Network users send and receive a variety of electronic messages through different communication mediums. Mobile telephone users, for example, frequently exchange Short Message Service (“SMS”)—and Multimedia Messaging Service (“MMS”). As SMS, MMS, and other electronic messages have proliferated, some users have electronic messages to perpetrate cyber fraud or engage in cyber phishing. Some existing messaging systems, for example, allow network users to create accounts using a communication number (e.g., a phone number or short code) without a name or allow for use of a pseudonym other than the user's legal name. This kind of registration can provide insufficient context for a recipient of an electronic message to identify and confidently communicate with the sender. Regardless of the type of registration offered, some existing messaging systems lack proper security checks for a user's identity and risk people or software bots sending an electronic message from an unidentified phone number or short code—with the message purporting to come from a person or organization.
Given these security vulnerabilities, organizations and individuals may inadvertently respond to electronic messages from unrecognized communication numbers, fictitious users, or false accounts. Conversely, organizations and individuals may ignore electronic messages from unrecognized communication numbers. In other words, network users are more likely to be suspicious of (and not respond to) electronic messages from an unrecognized communication number.
In addition to such cyber security risks, some existing messaging systems limit the senders and recipients to or from whom a user can send or receive electronic messages. In some cases, for instance, existing messaging systems limit users to sending or receiving electronic messages to or from other users with whom they have established a connection through a messaging or social networking system (e.g., by an invitation and acceptance to connect through a social networking system). This connection-dependent communication has several advantages—it controls the volume of electronic messages received by a user in a received-messages storage and limits the universe of potential senders or recipients who may exchange electronic messages with a particular user. But the connection-dependent communication also inhibits a user from exchanging electronic messages with persons or organizations that have not connected with the user through a messaging system or social networking system. To control unsolicited messages, for example, some existing messaging systems sequester electronic messages into a sequestration folder when the sender of the electronic message is not connected to the recipient (e.g., the sender and recipient are not friends or otherwise connected through the messaging system).
In addition to such limits on senders and recipients, some existing messaging systems lack a capability for users to communicate with non-users of the messaging system or other users to whom the users are not connected through the messaging system. For example, a messaging system may lack a workflow for users to communicate with non-users of the messaging system through additional communication mediums offered by more advanced messaging systems. Consequently, some users currently use a messaging application for one messaging system to send electronic messages and another messaging application for another messaging system to, for example, initiate a video conference for communications between the same persons or organizations.
In sum, some existing messaging systems are susceptible to cyber fraud or phishing—and provide little context to recipients—by relaying electronic messages with only a phone number, short code, or other communication number or, alternatively, a fictitious name. Additionally, some existing messaging systems lack workflows for messaging applications to engage persons outside of (or not connected within) the messaging system in additional communication mediums beyond electronic messages.